Section I The Strategic Self-Regulation (S2 Model of ...catalogue.pearsoned.co.uk/assets/hip/gb/hip_gb_pearsonhighered/... · Section I The Strategic Self-Regulation ... What are

Section

I The Strategic Self-Regulation (S2R)Model of languagelearning

M01_OXFO1292_01_SE_C01.QXD 4/8/10 18:36 Page 5


7

Chapter 1

Introducing the Strategic Self-Regulation (S2R) Model of language learning

You can’t cross the sea merely by standing and staring at the water.Rabindranath Tagore

Preview questions1. What are the dimensions in the Strategic Self-Regulation (S2R)

Model of language learning?2. How do “metastrategies” and other strategies differently contribute

to strategic self-regulation?3. What are the six types of metaknowledge, and why are they

important for learning languages?4. Why are tactics necessary in self-regulated learning?5. In what ways do models of self-regulated learning differ?

Self-regulation is one of the most exciting developments in second or foreign language (L2) learning. Models of learner self-regulation appliedto L2 learning have been called by many names, such as “learner-self-management” (Rubin, 2001), “learner self-direction” (Dickinson, 1987),“self-regulated or autonomous L2 learning” (Oxford, 1999a), and “mediatedlearning” (Scarcella and Oxford, 1992, based on Vygotsky, 1978). This bookpresents the Strategic Self-Regulation (S2R) Model of language learning.In this model, learners actively and constructively use strategies to managetheir own learning.

Self-regulated L2 learning strategies are important throughout the world.The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (Council of


Europe, 2001) promotes “learning how to learn” and the use of learningstrategies (Little, 2006; Mariani, 2004). Key research handbooks (e.g.,Alexander and Winne, 2006; Flippo and Caverly, 2008; Hinkel, 2005; seealso Chapter 9) discuss the significance of strategies in learners’ self-regulation in many fields, including L2 learning. In the last few years publishers have offered several important, edited volumes (e.g., Cohen andMacaro, 2007; Griffiths, 2008) focused wholly or largely on L2 learningstrategies. Every year journals around the globe publish articles on topicssuch as learning strategies, metacognitive strategies, and strategies for various L2 areas (reading, writing, speaking, listening, pragmatics, grammar,and vocabulary). Many teachers attend conference sessions on how to helptheir students become more strategic, self-regulated, and successful. Asimportant contributors to self-regulated learning, L2 learning strategiesdeserve attention. Table 1.1 provides a preview of this chapter.

1.1 Overview of the book

Figure 1.1 presents an overview of this book. Section I, consisting of the firstfour chapters, is devoted to the S2R Model of language learning and thefactors and theories underlying the model. Chapter 1 introduces the modelin terms of factors and integrated theories. Chapter 2 presents strategies

Table 1.1 Overview of this chapter

1.1 Overview of this book

1.2 Why this book is needed now

1.3 The S2R Model1.3.1 Definitions, terminology and concepts in the S2R Model1.3.2 Key features of strategies in the S2R Model1.3.3 The learner in the S2R Model1.3.4 Strategies and metastrategies in the S2R Model1.3.5 Metaknowledge underlying metastrategies in the S2R Model1.3.6 Flexible use of strategies in the S2R Model1.3.7 Task-phases in the S2R Model1.3.8 Mediated learning in the S2R Model1.3.9 Deep processing strategies in the S2R Model1.3.10 Inclusion of tactics in the S2R Model1.3.11 Double utility of strategies in the S2R Model1.3.12 Relationship of styles and strategies in the S2R Model

1.4 Nine ways the S2R Model is different

1.5 Conclusion

Further reading

TEACHING AND RESEARCHING LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES8


and theories in the cognitive dimension for remembering and processinglanguage. Chapters 3 and 4 offer strategies and theories in relation to twodimensions that have received inadequate attention from many strategyresearchers: the affective dimension for emotion, beliefs, attitudes, andmotivation and the sociocultural-interactive diimension for contexts, com-munication, and culture. Section II includes important practical applicationswithin the S2R Model: strategy assessment (Chapter 5) and strategy assist-ance (Chapter 6). The two chapters in Section III deal with strategy research.Chapter 7 explores an array of research approaches that readers can use forinvestigating strategies for self-regulated L2 learning. Chapter 8 synthesizesexisting L2 strategy research findings by language area, e.g., reading orvocabulary learning. Section IV contains Chapter 9, which reviews the land-marks of the S2R Model, maps self-regulated L2 learning strategies in relationto various disciplines, and offers further resources for exploration.

INTRODUCING THE STRATEGIC SELF-REGULATION (S2R) MODEL 9

Figure 1.1 Preview of the chapters in this book


1.2 Why this book is needed now

In an advance review of this book, Gu (2010) summarized the state of theart in language learning strategies and explained why this book is needednow. See Concept 1.1.


Concept 1.1 State of the art in language learning strategies and whythis book is needed now (from a review by a strategyresearch expert)

• State of the Art

After 30 years, language learning strategy (LLS) researchers have accumulateda critical mass of knowledge. It is now timely and critical to identify andreflect upon the various issues that have emerged across decades. We needsystematic and coherent efforts to chart the field and map out the issues.

Unfortunately, the intensity of interest in language learning strategies inthe 1980s and the 1990s and the high expectations from theorists, researchers,teachers and learners have left many people frustrated, especially because of theconceptual fuzziness and elusiveness of the LLS construct. Classroom teachersare rightly concerned that LLS researchers have not provided enough applica-tions for classroom teaching and learning. As those most concerned aboutstrategic learning, learners and teachers cannot and should not have to wait.We do not need the same old research questions asked time and again; weneed new, innovative research paths that lead to help for learners and teachers.

• Why This Book Is Needed Now

At this time, we urgently need this book’s conceptual cross-fertilization and itsconcerted effort in theory-building so that more useful research avenues canbe explored and more practical findings can be made available to the languageclassroom. This book opens the way to more research on the self-regulatedlearner’s active involvement and the way strategies influence learning ability,proficiency, and the learner’s identity as a self-initiating, reflective, responsiblesocial agent.

This book is therefore definitely coming out at the right time. In fact, fewwould be more suitable than Rebecca Oxford, who has inspired so many in the field, to write a book on teaching and researching language learningstrategies at this point in time. This book is the best attempt in recent yearsto face the existing challenges and issues. For researchers and teachers alike,the book provides a feast of theoretical perspectives, smoothly integrated andclearly addressed, as well as practical suggestions. It also discusses criticisms,queries, and misconceptions of language learning strategies.

To me, the book points to a renewed agenda for LLS as a worthwhile lineof research. This agenda involves: (a) closer integration of LLS research intothe mainstream of applied linguistics and educational psychology in terms of


1.3 The S2R Model

This section highlights key aspects of the S2R Model. It begins with defini-tion, terminology, and concepts, followed by key features of strategies in the model and a description of strategically self-regulated learners. Itpresents strategies, metastrategies, and the metaknowledge that underliesmetastrategies; details the flexible use of strategies; and explains strategiesin relaiton to three task-phases. Next it portrays mediated learning, deepprocessing strategies, double utility of strategies, and strategy orchestration.Finally, this section explains strategies and tactics and shows linkages amongstrategies, tactics, and learning styles.

1.3.1 Definitions, terminology, and concepts in the S2R Model

The quotation below defines self-regulation as applied to learning.

Concept 1.2 presents a definition of self-regulated L2 learning strategiesin the S2R Model. These strategies help learners regulate or control their


theorizing and empirical research; (b) closer integration of LLS into theteacher’s metapedagogical awareness, reflection, and classroom instruction;and (c) closer examination of individual strategies and tactics for learningeffectiveness. With this book, Rebecca Oxford has redesigned the LLS garden,redrawn the LLS landscape. I call for a re-injection of research energy andlabour. Let a hundred strategy flowers bloom for the cultivation of a theoret-ically colourful and practically useful garden, nourished by diverse ideas.

Yonqi Gu Co-Editor, Asian Journal of English Language Teaching (2010, pp. 1–3)

Quote 1.1 Self-regulation in learning

Self-regulation comprises such processes as setting goals for learning, attend-ing to and concentrating on instruction, using effective strategies to organize,code, and rehearse information to be remembered, establishing a productivework environment, using resources effectively, monitoring performance, managing time effectively, seeking assistance when needed, holding positivebeliefs about one’s capabilities, the value of learning, the factors influencinglearning, and the anticipated outcomes of actions, and experiencing pride andsatisfaction with one’s efforts.

Dale H. Schunk and Peggy A. Ertmer (2000, p. 631)


own learning, thus making it easier and more effective. Self-regulation,according to its Latin roots, involves not only self-management but also“self-righting,” i.e., self-adjustment or self-adaptation if something goesoff track or needs improvement. See Concept 1.2 for an important dis-tinction between skills and self-regulated L2 learning strategies, and lookto Chapter 2 for information on how skills develop.

Strategic, self-regulated language learning is crucial, as explained below.


Concept 1.2 Definition of self-regulated L2 learning strategies

• In the S2R Model, self-regulated L2 learning strategies are defined asdeliberate, goal-directed attempts to manage and control efforts to learnthe L2 (based on Afflerbach, Pearson, and Paris, 2008). These strategiesare broad, teachable actions that learners choose from among alternativesand employ for L2 learning purposes (e.g., constructing, internalizing,storing, retrieving, and using information; completing short-term tasks;and/or developing L2 proficiency and self-efficacy in the long term).Examples: Planning, Evaluating, Obtaining and Using Resources, Reasoning,Going Beyond Existing Data, Generating and Maintaining Motivation,and Learning Despite Communicative Knowledge Gaps.

• Learning strategies are sometimes confused with skills. Skills are automaticand out of awareness, whereas strategies are intentional and deliberate.

• It is impossible to tell whether an action is a strategy or a skill without find-ing out whether it is under the learner’s automatic or deliberate control.

Quote 1.2 The importance of strategic, self-regulated learning and of strategy instruction

Strategic, self-regulated learning lies at the heart of second/foreign languageacquisition. Over the decades, we have seen applied linguists suggesting theright amount of comprehensible input, opportunities for output, correctivefeedback, task-based presentation, and contextual scaffolding in the classroom.But after all this, the only thing teachers can do is to wait and hope that learners will notice the patterns or automatically activate their implicit learningmechanisms. While this might happen, the central thesis behind languagelearning strategy research is that learners, supported by teachers and curricula,can play a much more active role in managing and controlling the learningprocess, thereby maximising the outcomes of learning. Instruction in strategiclearning can result in better learners.

Yongqi Gu (2010, p. 1)


Gu (2010) defined strategic, self-regulated learning as “ways of tack-ling the learning task at hand and managing the self in overseeing the learning process . . . under the constraints of the learning situation andlearning context for the purpose of learning success” (p. 2). In other words,the learner must not only effectively do the task and manage himself or herself but must also deal with (and make the most of ) the learning environment.

When learning strategies became well known in the 1980’s and 1990’s,some people might have believed that strategies would remove all the hardwork from language learning and teaching. However, “Strategies are not a‘super-drug’ ” (Gu, 2010, p. 2). “A simplistic, static, and gimmick-orientedexpectation,” as if strategies “could offer quick fixes . . . , is unrealistic”(Gu, 2010, p. 1). Though learning strategies do make learning easier insome senses, their purpose is much more significant: strategies make learn-ing deeper, more productive, and more lasting (Cohen and Macaro, 2008;Holschuh and Altman, 2008; Winne and Perry, 2000).

This book uses the term learning strategies rather the term learner strategies(see Wenden and Rubin, 1987; Cohen and Macaro, 2007) for two key reasons.First, the focus here is on strategies for learning, although communicationoften occurs at the same time. People often learn as they communicate andvice versa. Second, learning-focused researchers in virtually all other fieldsemploy the term learning strategies. For discussions about the terminologyof strategies, see Cohen (2007) and Oxford and Cohen (1992).

1.3.2 Key features of strategies in the S2R Model

Concept 1.3 describes the features of strategies in the S2R Model. In a nutshell, these strategies involve various types of consciousness, facilitatelearning, involve the whole learner rather than just the cognitive side, andare used flexibly.


Quote 1.3 Strategically self-regulated learners

“Strategic” describes the way in which these [self-regulated] learners approachchallenging tasks and problems by choosing from a repertoire of tactics thosethey believe best suited to the situation, and applying those tactics appropri-ately. . . . The labels of tactic and strategy also reflect differences in grain size,the latter being larger . . .

Philip H. Winne and Nancy E. Perry (2000, pp. 533–534, 557)


1.3.3 The learner in the S2R Model

The S2R Model draws upon research on strategically self-regulated learners (see Concept 1.4). The research is strikingly consistent on these learners’ active control of learning through the effective use of learningstrategies. A key for such learners is choosing appropriate strategies for the purpose and situation and evaluating the success of these strategies.Learners can use strategies to regulate many aspects of their learning: their internal mental states, beliefs, observable behaviours, and the learn-ing environment.

1.3.4 Strategies and metastrategies in the S2R Model

The S2R Model includes strategies for three major, mutually influentialdimensions of L2 learning: cognitive, affective, and sociocultural-interactive.Cognitive strategies help the learner construct, transform, and apply L2knowledge. An example of a cognitive strategy is Activating Knowledge(when needed for a language task). Affective strategies help the learner create positive emotions and attitudes and stay motivated. An example of anaffective strategy is Generating and Maintaining Motivation. Sociocultural-interactive (SI) strategies help the learner with communication, socioculturalcontexts, and identity. An example of an SI strategy is Interacting to Learn


Concept 1.3 Features of self-regulated L2 learning strategies

Self-regulated L2 learning strategies . . .• are employed consciously, involving four elements of consciousness

(awareness, attention, intention, and effort, Schmidt, 1995);• make learning easier, faster, more enjoyable, and more effective;• are manifested through specific tactics in different contexts and for

different purposes;• reflect the whole, multidimensional learner, not just the learner’s cognitive

or metacognitive aspects;• are often combined into strategy chains, i.e., groups of strategies working

together (see later in this chapter); and• are applied in a given situation but can be transferred to other situations

when relevant.• Some strategies, such as Planning or Monitoring, are deployed for learning

many subjects and for problem-solving in general throughout one’s life.• Other strategies, such as Overcoming Knowledge Gaps in Communicat-

ing (e.g., through making up new words or switching back to the homelanguage briefly), are tied to language learning.


and Communicate. Pervading all three dimensions is a crucial dimensionof mental processes or tools (metastrategies, such as Planning, Organizing,Monitoring, and Evaluating) that help the learner control and manage the use of strategies in the three other dimensions: cognitive, affective, andsociocultural-interactive. Concept 1.5 lists the strategies and metastrategiesin the S2R Model. Metastrategies are shown first, because they powerfullyinfluence the three other dimensions.

As shown in Concept 1.5, three types of metastrategies exist. Meta-cognitive strategies (the best known type of metastrategies, as described byO’Malley and Chamot, 1990 and Oxford, 1990) help the learner controlcognitive strategy use, while meta-affective strategies facilitate learner con-trol of affective strategy use, and meta-SI strategies enable the learner to


Concept 1.4 What we know about strategically self-regulated learners

Strategically self-regulated learners . . .• actively participate in their own learning (Griffiths, 2008; Malpass,

O’Neil, and Hocevar, 1999; Pressley and Harris, 2006).• achieve learning goals by controlling various aspects of their learning

(Malpass, O’Neil, and Hocevar, 1999; Oxford, 1990).• regulate their cognitive and affective states (covert self-regulation), their

observable performance (behavioral self-regulation), and the environmentalconditions for learning (environmental self-regulation) (Zimmerman, 2000).

• use strategies to control their own beliefs about learning and themselves(Schunk and Zimmerman, 1998).

• cognitively move from declarative (conscious) knowledge to procedural(automatic) knowledge with the use of strategies (Anderson, 1976, 1985;O’Malley and Chamot, 1990).

• choose appropriate strategies for different conditions, purposes, situations,and settings (Ehrman, Leaver, and Oxford, 2003). An appropriate strategy isone that (a) addresses the learner’s goal or need, (b) fits the learning circum-stances and the sociocultural context, (c) works well with the student’slearning styles, i.e., general learning preferences, or in some cases helps bringgreater flexibility to those preferences; and (d) positively influences learning.

• understand that no strategy is necessarily appropriate under every circumstance or for every purpose (Hsiao and Oxford, 2002; Cohen andMacaro, 2007). For instance, a strategy that a learner uses effectively to read a airport timetable in Russian does necessarily not work when heor she is reading an editorial in the Russian newspaper Izvestiya.

• show awareness of the relationship between strategy use and learning out-comes; i.e., these learners consider whether a given strategy is associatedwith successful performance (Malpass, O’Neil, and Hocevar, 1999).


control SI strategy use. Why is it helpful to talk about metastrategies, abroader category, as opposed to only metacognitive strategies? Why shouldwe think about meta-affective and meta-SI strategies in addition to meta-cognitive strategies? Here are the reasons. Metacognitive simply means “beyondthe cognitive” and includes strategies that provide general management(control) of cognitive strategies. Unfortunately, prior taxonomies of strategieshad no term to describe control of two other key dimensions of L2 learning


Concept 1.5 Metastrategies and strategies in the Strategic Self-Regulation (S2R) Model of L2 learning

Metastrategies and strategies

8 metastrategies (metacognitive, meta-affective, and metasociocultural-interactive):

Paying AttentionPlanningObtaining and Using ResourcesOrganizingImplementing PlansOrchestrating Strategy UseMonitoringEvaluating

6 strategies in the cognitive dimension:

Using the Senses to Understand and RememberActivating KnowledgeReasoningConceptualizing with DetailsConceptualizing BroadlyGoing Beyond the Existing Data

2 strategies in the affective dimension:

Activating Supportive Emotions, Beliefs, and Attitudes Generating and Maintaining Motivation

3 strategies in the sociocultural-interactive dimension:

Interacting to Learn and CommunicateLearning Despite Communicative Knowledge GapsDealing with Sociocultural Contexts and Identities

Purpose

Managing and controling L2learning in a general sense,with a focus on understandingone’s own needs and usingand adjusting the otherstrategies to meet those needs

Remembering and processingthe L2 (constructing,transforming, and applyingL2 knowledge)

Handling emotions, beliefs,attitudes, and motivation inL2 learning

Dealing with issues ofcontexts, communication, andculture in L2 learning


strategies: (a) the affective dimension and (b) the social dimension. Hence,until now the term metacognitive was (confusingly, in my view) applied tothe control of strategies in the affective and social realms, not just to thecontrol of cognitive strategies. The S2R Model fills this major gap byincluding meta-affective strategies and meta-SI strategies, respectively. Theimportance of filling this gap is revealed especially in Chapters 3 and 4,which explore these strategies in detail. Many effective L2 learners have usedsuch strategies for years, though there was no official name for them.

The concept of metastrategies – more than just that of metacognitivestrategies alone – reflects the multidimensional reality of the L2 learner.Support for more than just one category of metastrategy comes fromAlexander, Graham, and Harris (1998), who stated that self-regulation pertains not just to the learner’s management of cognition but also to regulation of affective states and the social environment, in which com-munication occurs. Additional support comes from Wolters (2003), whohighlighted the need for strategies to manage affect (emotions, motivation,etc.) at the “meta” or general level.

Figure 1.2 shows cognitive, affective, and sociocultural-interactive strategiesas interlocking cogs and depicts metastrategies as the arrows that surround


Figure 1.2 Dynamic interaction of strategies and metastrategies for L2learning (cogs and arrows metaphor) in the S2R ModelNote 1: Metastrategies include metacognitive, meta-affective, and metasocial strategies.Note 2: Certain strategies are more important than others in various situations. The size ofa strategy type in this figure does not indicate importance in all situations.


the cogs. Of course, actual L2 learning is not as mechanistic as cogs in awheel, but Figure 1.2 is a useful metaphor of (a) multiple, interrelated aspectsof learning and (b) the way metastrategies (metacognitive, meta-affective, andmeta-SI) control the use of cognitive, affective, and SI strategies. Figure 1.3shows the same idea in a different way. The metastrategies (metacognitive,meta-affective, and meta-SI) serve as the orchestra conductor, and varioussections of the orchestra (wind, string, and percussion instruments) arecognitive, affective, and SI strategies, guided by the conductor.

Metastrategies, by virtue of their executive-control and managementfunction, help the learner know whether and how to deploy a given strategy and aid in determining whether the strategy is working or hasworked as intended. Strategies and metastrategies in the model are highlydynamic, because they respond to changing needs of the learner for varying


Figure 1.3 Metastrategies guide the use of cognitive, affective, andsociocultural-interactive (SI) strategies (orchestra–conductor metaphor) inthe S2R ModelNote: In the past, metacognitive strategies were viewed as guiding the use of all otherstrategies. However, in a more articulated and more precise manner, metastrategies(metacognitive, meta-affective, and meta-SI strategies) guide the use of cognitive, affective, and sociocultural-interactive strategies, respectively.

FPO


purposes in different sociocultural contexts. Metastrategic regulation is thelearner’s use of metastrategies of any kind (metacognitive, meta-affective,and/or meta-SI) the purpose of self-regulated learning. This is an expansionof Flavell’s (1978, 1979) term metacognitive regulation to identify the use ofmetacognitive strategies.

1.3.5 Metaknowledge underlying metastrategies in the S2R Model

Underlying the use of metastrategies in the S2R Model are six types ofmetaknowledge, defined in Concept 1.6: person knowledge, which is con-trasted with broader knowledge of cultural or group norms (group/cultureknowledge); task knowledge, which is contrasted with broader, whole-processknowledge; strategy knowledge; and conditional knowledge, which draws on anyof the other types of knowledge. In an earlier theory, Wenden (1991), build-ing on Flavell (1978, 1979), mentioned only three types of metaknowledge(person, task, and strategy knowledge) and called all three metacognitiveknowledge.


Concept 1.6 Six types of metaknowledge

• Person knowledge concerns learning styles, goals, strengths, and weaknessesof the learner (or someone else). Focus is on the individual.

• Group or culture knowledge deals with norms and expectations in the group/culture – either the home group/culture or the “target” group/culture towhich the learner wants to gain entry. Focus is on the collective group,not on a single individual.

• Task knowledge relates largely to the characteristics and requirements ofthe immediate L2 learning task.

• In contrast, whole-process knowledge goes beyond task knowledge to embracethe characteristics and requirements of the long-term process of learningthe language. Whole-process knowledge is often necessary for learnerswho seek to develop high proficiency and who have a “future orientation”to learning (Simons, Vansteenkiste, Lens, and Lacante, 2004).

• Strategy knowledge is knowledge of available learning strategies and meta-strategies and how they work. Strategy knowledge can be examined interms of strategies for “doing” and metastrategies for executive controland management.

• Conditional knowledge is knowledge of when and why to use a given learn-ing strategy. Conditional knowledge can draw on any or all of the otherfive types of metaknowledge.• For example, knowing when and why to use a given strategy is facilitated

by being aware of: (a) personal knowledge about oneself, e.g., one’slearning style, goals, strengths, and weaknesses; (b) group or culture


I argue that metacognitive knowledge, as applied by prior researchers to encompass person, task, and strategy knowledge, is far too restricted aterm. The term metacognitive knowledge points only to knowledge help-ful for controlling the cognitive dimension of learning, but in actuality thelearner’s metaknowledge must include but go beyond the cognitive arena.Such knowledge must also address the affective and sociocultural-interactivedimensions of L2 learning. Therefore, it is more accurate to speak of meta-knowledge rather than just metacognitive knowledge when considering theknowledge types that underlie metastrategies in general.

Wenden’s and Flavell’s knowledge types – person, task, and strategyknowledge – are necessary but not sufficient for explaining the learner’scontrol and management of L2 learning. For instance, person knowledgedoes not imply knowledge of expectations of the group or culture in which the learner is located or which the learner wishes to enter, thoughsuch knowledge is needed for self-regulated L2 learning. Task know-ledge refers to understanding the demands and features of the immediatetask but does not imply long-term, whole-process knowledge, which isespecially valuable for learners who hope to reach distinguished levels ofproficiency and/or whose self-regulation involves taking a “long view” or future-time perspective. Knowledge of strategies does not necessarily indicate that the learner knows how, when, or why to use a particular strategy to fulfill a specific purpose in the flux and complexity of a givensociocultural setting (conditional knowledge). Therefore it was necessaryfor me to create names for two heretofore missing types of metaknow-ledge, group/culture knowledge and whole-process knowledge, and to includeconditional knowledge (Pintrich, 2002) as the sixth type of metaknowledge.See Figure 1.4.

Concept 1.7F shows how each type of metaknowledge (person knowledge,group/culture knowledge, task knowledge, whole-process knowledge, strategyknowledge, and conditional knowledge) is applied in more concrete detailto cognitive, affective, and sociocultural-interactive dimensions.


knowledge, e.g., norms, values, and expectations of the group or culture;(c) task knowledge, e.g., demands and characteristics of the immediatetask; (d) whole-process knowledge, e.g., probable requirements andfeatures of long-term L2 learning; and (e) strategy knowledge, e.g.,available strategies and metastrategies and how they work.

• Pintrich (2002) classified conditional knowledge as being only part of“task knowledge,” but this is too limited, because some learners canapply conditional knowledge well beyond single tasks.

• Learners with a future time orientation often apply conditional know-ledge over longer periods containing multiple tasks.


Figure 1.5 outlines in brief the structure of the S2R Model, emphasizingstrategies and metastrategies. These elements interact to improve L2learning and move students to higher levels of proficiency.

1.3.6 Flexible use of strategies in the S2R Model

Not every learner needs to use every type of strategy at all times. For instance,if a learner, Brian, is demotivated, stressed, or feeling overly challenged, hemight need affective strategies, but at other times, when he feels motivated,calm, and sufficiently but not overly challenged, such strategies might beunnecessary. Highly advanced L2 learners who have reached distinguishedlevels of proficiency tend not to need affective strategies any longer, accord-ing to Leaver (2003a), though this might depend somewhat on the learner’spersonality or general (non-L2) level of anxiety.


Figure 1.4 Types of metaknowledge underlying metastrategies in the S2R Model



Con

cept

1.7

Type

s of

met

akno

wle

dge

as a

pplie

d to

cog

nitiv

e, a

ffect

ive,

and

soc

iocu

ltura

-inte

ract

ive

dim

ensi

ons

of L

2 le

arni

ng

Typ

es o

f m

etak

now

ledg

e

Dim

ensi

ons

of L

2 le

arni

ng

in w

hich

m

etak

now

ledg

e op

erat

es

Cog

nitiv

e di

men

sion

TY

PE

1:

Per

son

know

ledg

e(c

an r

efer

tokn

owle

dge

of s

elf o

r of

anot

her

pers

on)

(Nar

row

er)

Kno

wle

dge

ofon

e’s

own

oran

othe

r’s

cogn

itive

leve

l,co

gniti

vele

arni

ng s

tyle

,go

als,

and

rela

ted

stre

ngth

s an

dw

eakn

esse

s

TY

PE

2:

Gro

up o

rcu

ltur

ekn

owle

dge

(Bro

ader

)

Kno

wle

dge

ofgr

oup/

cultu

ral

norm

s an

dex

pect

atio

nsin

rel

atio

n to

cogn

itive

elem

ents

of

L2

lear

ning

TY

PE

3:

Tas

kkn

owle

dge

(imm

edia

te L

2le

arni

ng ta

sk)

(Nar

row

er)

Kno

wle

dge

ofth

e co

gniti

vede

man

ds o

f the

imm

edia

te L

2le

arni

ng ta

sk

TY

PE

4:

Who

le-

proc

ess

know

ledg

e(lo

nger

-ter

m,

futu

re-t

ime

orie

ntat

ion)

(Bro

ader

)

Kno

wle

dge

oflo

nger

-ter

mco

gniti

vede

man

ds

of le

arni

ng

the

L2

TY

PE

5: S

trat

egy

know

ledg

eK

now

ledg

e of

lear

ning

stra

tegi

es a

ndm

etas

trat

egie

s(c

ogni

tive,

aff

ectiv

e, a

nd S

Ist

rate

gies

and

met

acog

nitiv

e,m

eta-

affe

ctiv

e, a

nd m

eta-

SIst

rate

gies

)

Kno

wle

dge

of c

ogni

tive

stra

tegi

es

Kno

wle

dge

of m

eta-

cogn

itive

stra

tegi

es

TY

PE

6:

Con

diti

onal

know

ledg

eof

how

, whe

n, a

ndw

hy to

use

agi

ven

stra

tegy

,dr

awin

g on

the

othe

r ty

pes

ofm

etak

now

ledg

e

Kno

wle

dge

of h

ow, w

hen

and

why

to

use

a co

gniti

vest

rate

gy o

r a

met

acog

nitiv

est

rate

gy fo

r a

give

n pu

rpos

ein

a s

peci

ficse

ttin

g



Aff

ectiv

e di

men

sion

Soci

ocul

tura

l-in

tera

ctiv

e di

men

sion

Kno

wle

dge

ofon

e’s

own

oran

othe

r’s

emot

ions

,m

otiv

atio

ns,

and

rela

ted

stre

ngth

s an

dw

eakn

esse

s

Kno

wle

dge

ofon

e’s

own

oran

othe

r’s

soci

alin

tera

ctio

npa

tter

ns, s

ocia

lle

arni

ng s

tyle

,re

late

dst

reng

ths

and

wea

knes

ses,

and

the

soci

ocul

tura

lse

ttin

g

Kno

wle

dge

ofgr

oup/

cultu

ral

norm

s an

dex

pect

atio

nsin

rel

atio

n to

affe

ctiv

eel

emen

ts o

fL

2 le

arni

ng

Kno

wle

dge

ofgr

oup/

cultu

ral

norm

s an

dex

pect

atio

nsin

rel

atio

n to

inte

ract

ion

and

soci

ocul

tura

lel

emen

ts o

fL

2 le

arni

ng

Kno

wle

dge

ofaf

fect

ive

(em

otio

nal o

rm

otiv

atio

nal)

dem

ands

of t

heim

med

iate

L2

lear

ning

task

Kno

wle

dge

ofso

cioc

ultu

ral-

inte

ract

ive

dem

ands

of t

heim

med

iate

L2

lear

ning

task

Kno

wle

dge

oflo

nger

-ter

maf

fect

ive

dem

ands

of

lear

ning

th

e L

2

Kno

wle

dge

oflo

nger

-ter

mso

cioc

ultu

ral-

inte

ract

ive

dem

ands

of

lear

ning

th

e L

2

Kno

wle

dge

of a

ffec

tive

Stra

tegi

es

Kno

wle

dge

ofso

cioc

ultu

ral-

inte

ract

ive

(SI)

str

ateg

ies

Kno

wle

dge

of m

eta-

affe

ctiv

est

rate

gies

Kno

wle

dge

of m

eta-

SIst

rate

gies

Kno

wle

dge

of h

ow, w

hen

and

why

to u

sean

aff

ectiv

est

rate

gy o

r a

met

a-af

fect

ive

stra

tegy

for

agi

ven

purp

ose

in a

spe

cific

sett

ing

Kno

wle

dge

ofho

w, w

hen

and

why

to u

se a

soci

ocul

tura

l-in

tera

ctiv

est

rate

gy o

r a

met

a-SI

stra

tegy

for

agi

ven

purp

ose

in a

spe

cific

sett

ing


Learners are not likely to “grow out of ” their need for metacognitivestrategies and sociocultural-interactive strategies. No matter what the levelof L2 proficiency, if a learner is losing concentration, he or she might needto employ the metacognitive strategy of Paying Attention, or if the learnerwants to build a significant, long-term relationship with someone in theL2, he or she might need to employ a sociocultural-interactive strategy,such as Dealing with Sociocultural Contexts and Identities.

Certain cognitive strategies, such as Conceptualizing with Details andReasoning, are valuable for multiple purposes at all proficiency levels, butthese strategies must be applied in ways that fit the situation. If a native


Figure 1.5 One view of the S2R Model, emphasising metastrategies and strategies


English speaker is listening to a lecture in Romanian and trying to pick out the key content points, it would not help him or her to analyze thestructure of every sentence and all the word endings.

1.3.7 Task-phases in the S2R Model

The S2R Model includes a sequence of phases for doing a task or solving aproblem (Figure 1.6). The sequence is as follows:

• Task-phase 1 is strategic forethought. In Phase 1, the learner pays atten-tion to the demands of the task, sets goals, plans how to address them,and activates existing knowledge.

• Task-phase 2 is strategic performance (sometimes called strategic implementa-tion, monitoring, and control). In this task-phase, the learner (a) implementsthe plan, (b) monitors how well the plan is working, and (c) decideswhether to continue the task as it is going, stop entirely, or make changesin the approach to the task. The aspect labeled (c) in the prior sentenceis the “control” or “regulation” part of Task-phase 2. Some theorists ofself-regulated learning have tried to split this phase into distinct phasesof monitoring and control, yet the same theorists have stated, “empiricalwork on monitoring . . . and control/regulation . . . does not find muchseparation of these processes in terms of people’s experiences” (Wolters,Pintrich, and Karabenick, 2003, p. 6).

• Task-phase 3 is strategic reflection and evaluation and includes making judg-ments of value about outcomes, effectiveness of strategies, and self (e.g.,self-efficacy, which is the learner’s belief he or she can meet a given goal).


Figure 1.6 Task-phases in the S2R ModelNote: Learners do not always follow this linear order.Source: Adapted from Zimmerman, Bonner, and Kovachs (1996).


In social-cognitive research on self-regulated learning, Zimmerman et al.(1996) showed that learners used a cycle similar to the one in Figure 1.6 forcomprehending and summarizing texts, taking classroom notes, planningand managing time, and preparing for tests, resulting in increases in learn-ing and self-efficacy. Other names are sometimes used for the task-phases(Bandura, 1997; Eisenberg and Berkowitz, 1988; Winne and Hadwin, 1998).

The S2R Model employs these task-phases because they suggest approximately when certain learning strategies or metastrategies are likelyto be useful. For example, the strategies of Planning and of ActivatingKnowledge occur primarily in Task-phase 1, strategic forethought. Themetastrategy of Monitoring naturally occurs in Task-phase 2, strategic performance (strategic implementation, monitoring, and control). Task-phase 2 is the natural home for strategies such as Conceptualizing Broadly,Conceptualizing with Details, Going Beyond the Immediate Data, andOvercoming Gaps in Communicating. The metastrategy of Evaluatingemerges mostly in Task-phase 3, strategic reflection and evaluation.

However, the task-phases are not always neatly linear; some learners usethe phases in a different order. For example, although one learner, Mark,uses the Task-phase 1 – 2 – 3 order as shown, a different learner, Alexander,jumps directly into task performance (Task-phase 2) without any planningand then, when he feels lost, he goes back and plans (ordinarily Task-phase 1,but not for him). In addition, the phases are not always strategically dis-tinct, because some strategies can appear in multiple phases. For instance, thestrategy of Activating Knowledge logically occurs as part of strategic fore-thought (Task-phase 1), but knowledge can be reactivated in Task-phase 2.The metastrategy of Planning is obviously necessary for Task-phase 1, butthe learner can re-plan during Task-phase 2 if the original plan goes awry.In fact, this type of strategic adjustment is exactly what self-regulation is all about. The metastrategy of Evaluating can occur at any time duringlearning, even though it is most predominant in Task-phase 3, strategicreflection and evaluation.

Although task-phases have heuristic value for considering how andwhen strategies are used, L2 tasks offer just one way of looking at strategic learning. Another viewpoint on strategies, as mentioned earlier, is the


Quote 1.3 Not always linear

. . . [T]here is no strong assumption that the phases are hierarchically or linearlystructured such that earlier phases must always occur before later phases.

Christopher Wolters, Paul Pintrich, and Stuart A. Karabenick (2003, p. 6)


future-time perspective, which considers the longer-term strategic processof learning a language. For instance, the learner might ask, “What does it take to reach professional proficiency in Chinese? What strategies do I want to use to achieve that goal? Is strategy X still helping me, as it didbefore, or does it get in my way now? Should I drop this strategy as I moveup the proficiency scale?”

1.3.8 Mediated learning in the S2R Model

Two strong assumptions of the S2R Model are: (a) Almost everyone canlearn an additional language effectively by employing appropriate strategies,assuming some basic interest in learning the language and sufficient time.(b) Strategies can be learned through mediation or assistance. Not everystudent has strategic expertise at the outset. Expertise in employing lan-guage learning strategies “is not present in every learner; it . . . needs to bedeveloped” (Gu, 2010, p. 1) with help or mediation from others.

The mediated ability of people to learn even very difficult things is thefoundation of Reuven Feuerstein’s Instrumental Enrichment (IE) Program,which has been successfully used with learners of English as a foreign lan-guage, disadvantaged students, and many others (Burden and Williams,1998; Garb and Kozulin, 1998; International Center for Enhancement ofLearning Potential, 2007). The IE Program was designed to help modifymental structures (schemata) and teach operations (i.e., strategies) throughmediation by a skilled teacher (Feuerstein, Falik, Rand, and Feuerstein,2006; Feuerstein, Rand, Hoffman, and Miller, 1997). The IE Program’smediated learning experiences help learners draw out general rules andprinciples (the “abstraction” process) from tasks and then bridge to othertasks and applications. One of the most fascinating aspects of IE’s mediatedlearning is the use of dynamic assessment, which is a “test-teach-test” modeinvolving a dialogue between the learner and a more competent person, whofirst tests the learner’s performance, then teaches operations or strategiesfor improving performance, and finally retests the strategy-enhanced per-formance (Feuerstein, Rand, and Hoffman, 1979; Kozulin and Garb, 2001).Tested performance is consistently better after students have had theopportunity to learn and use strategies.

In Vygotsky’s sociocultural model, as well as in the S2R Model, all learning is assumed to be assisted (mediated) performance. Vygotsky stated that the “more capable other” leads the actively engaged student, by means of mediation (various kinds of assistance and scaffolding), through that student’s “zone of proximal development,” or ZPD (the area of learning thata particular student can optimally traverse with assistance). The teacher or other person helps the learner by modelling “higher mental functions,”such as Conceptualizing with Details or Conceptualizing Broadly, whichthe S2R Model calls strategies. Even if the student is learning outside of a



classroom, learning is always mediated by interaction with cultural tools,such as books, media, technology, and language itself. See Concept 1.8 forVygotsky’s model of self-regulated learning.

Related to the idea of mediation in the S2R Model is the concept of situated cognition or situated learning. Sociocultural theories suggest that all learning is embedded or situated in particular sociocultural settings(Brown, Collins, and Duguid, 1989; Greeno, 1998), which offer properties(called affordances) that either encourage or constrain learning (Van Lier,1997). In situated cognition, learners are viewed as active agents, whosechoice of strategies is influenced but not determined by the socioculturalcontext (Oxford, 2003).

The S2R Model agrees with several sociocultural models, which state thatlearners are part of communities of practice. A community of practice is an


Concept 1.8 Vygotsky’s model of dialogic, self-regulated learning

• Vygotsky’s model of self-regulated learning states that learning is mediatedthrough language and especially through dialogues with a more capableperson (or through books, technology, or other means).

• The learner appropriates (actively internalizes and transforms) essentialfeatures of the dialogues by means of three stages: social speech (other-regulation), egocentric speech (the learner subvocalizes but does not fullyself-regulate), and inner speech (self-regulation).

• To facilitate internalization of the dialogues and help the learner traversethe zone of proximal development, the more knowledgeable individualoffers scaffolding (assistance), such as modelling or providing materialsand explanations. Scaffolding is withdrawn when no longer needed.

• Building on Oxford (1999a), it is possible to identify the following self-regulated learning strategies in Vygotsky’s work: Planning, Conceptualizingwith Details (especially analyzing), Conceptualizing Broadly (especiallysynthesizing), Monitoring, and Evaluating, all of which Vygotsky (1981)called higher-order mental functions.

• In the dialogic relationship between the learner and the more capable person,the strategy of Interacting to Learn and Communicate is also evident.

• Inner speech can be used for metastrategic, self-management purposes.• Cognitition is distributed. This means that learning, knowledge, and even

intelligence are distributed across people and across social practices andcultural tools (symbols, technologies, artifacts, and language) used bycommunities (Gee, 2007; Vygotsky, 1978).

Source: Summarized from Vygotsky (1978, 1979, 1981) and Oxford (1999a). For relatedbut not identical view of learning strategies in Vygotsky’s model, see McCaslin andHickey (2001).


authentic, meaningful group centred on specific practices, goals, beliefs, andareas of learning within an environment, which can be local or electronicallynetworked (Fine, 1987; Lave and Wenger, 1991, Wenger, McDermott, andSnyder 2002). Newcomers or apprentices at first “participate peripherally”in the community and observe strategies used by those who have been inthe group longer, especially central people known as “old-timers” or experts(Lave and Wenger, 1991; Levine, Reves, and Leaver, 1996). Graduallynewcomers move closer to the center of the community of practice if thecircumstances are welcoming.

In a community of practice, a learner ideally participates in what is calledcognitive apprenticeship, i.e., a strategic, practical learning-based relation-ship with a more capable other (Collins, 1988). Cognitive apprenticeshiphelps students to acquire, develop, and use learning strategies in authenticactivities via interaction, social construction of knowledge, scaffolding,modelling, goal-setting, peer sharing, and learner reflection (Brown, Collins,and Duguid, 1989). Learners’ strategy use can be similar for cognitiveapprenticeships in literacy in the native language (L1) and the L2 (Lee,2007) if the languages are relatively similar, but their strategy use can differdramatically across the L1 and the L2 if one is an alphabetic language andthe other language involves characters. An example of cognitive apprentice-ship is the Reciprocal Teaching Approach to reading (Palincsar and Brown,1984). In this approach, the teacher first models and scaffolds expert read-ing strategies, such as summarizing (part of Conceptualizing Broadly in theS2R Model) or inferring and predicting (both are aspects of Going Beyondthe Immediate Data in the S2R Model), and then “fades” the scaffoldinggradually when it is no longer needed. Students share their summaries,inferences, and predictions and receive feedback from other students in groupswithin the classroom. Graham and Harris’ (1996) model, Self-RegulationStrategy Development (SRSD), involves both group and individual writingstrategies. Research shows that strategically self-regulated learning inclassroom communities of practice is useful for all students, from the mostexpert learners to those who have serious linguistic or cognitive disabilities(Harris and Graham, 2005).

Learners need to know and use strategies to get the most out of mediatedlearning, whether in the classroom, in informal learning, or at a distance(Kozulin, Gindis, Ageyev, and Miller, 2003; Vygotsky, 1986; White, 1995).Metastrategies such as Planning or Paying Attention, affective strategies suchas Generating and Maintaining Motivation, and sociocultural-interactivestrategies such as Interacting to Learn and Communicate can all enablelearners to expand the fruitful interactions with teachers or other mediators.

1.3.9 Deep processing strategies in the S2R Model

The cognitive and metacognitive strategies in the S2R Model are deep pro-cessing strategies, which facilitate understanding, increase meaningful mental



associations, and are the most useful strategies for long-term retention ofinformation. For example, cognitive strategies of Reasoning, Conceptualizingwith Details, and Conceptualizing Broadly and metacognitive strategies ofPlanning, Montoring, and Evaluating can contribute to deep processing. Thestudents who regularly use deep processing strategies are often intrinsicallymotivated for learning or personal growth, and they show task persistence,good performance, and ability to regulate their own learning (Vansteenkiste,Simons, Lens, Sheldon, and Deci, 2004; Alexander, 1997).

In contrast, surface strategies help learners memorize material in orderto repeat it when necessary, but without a goal of learning. Students whoadopt surface strategies, such as rote memorization, as their only strategiesare typically poor in test grades, task persistence, and long-term retentionof information (Schmeck, 1988; Vansteenkiste et al., 2004). “. . . [S]tudentswho adopt surface approaches begin a task with the sole purpose of taskcompletion rather than learning, which leads to verbatim recall or the useof rote memorization strategies” (Holschuh and Aultman, 2008, p. 123).Vansteenkiste et al. (2004, p. 246) argued that the use of surface strategies isrelated to having unstable self-esteem, making “excessive social comparisons,”or being in a situation that discourages self-regulation. This does not meanthat rote memorization strategies are a total waste of effort; Chapter 2explores the potential value of rote strategies. However, if such strategiesare the only ones a learner uses for L2 learning, the results can be negative.Too much use of surface strategies “can impair students’ ability to inter-relate concepts . . . [and cause learners to] reach a point where they areunable to grasp new material” (Holschuh and Aultman, p. 123).

Alexander’s research (1997) shows that at the acclimation or novice stageof learning in a given domain (field), the learner has low knowledge, is situationally interested rather than personally engaged with the material,and uses only surface strategies. However, other studies (Ehrman, Romanova,Braun, and Wei, 2004; Oxford, Lavine, Felkins, Hollaway, and Saleh, 1996)show that even when learning an additional language for the very first


Quote 1.4 Why a deep approach is necessary

. . . [S]tudents who adopt deep approaches to learning tend to personalize academic tasks and integrate information so that they can see relationshipsamong ideas. . . . Deep approaches . . . allow the learner to build on previousknowledge in a meaningful way that facilitates long-term learning. . . . Studentswho use deep approaches have been shown to be more successful at bothselecting strategies and monitoring when comprehension breaks down. . . .

Jodi Patrick Holschuh and Lori Price Aultman (2008, p. 123)


time, some talented, creative learners develop or apply deep processingstrategies rather than surface strategies right away and are personally,intrinsically interested from the outset. Teachers can help other learners toemploy deep processing strategies at a relatively early stage if the learnersbelieve these strategies can help them (Lee and Oxford, 2008). Thus, thefact that a learner has only a very limited amount of L2 knowledge doesnot prevent the use of deep processing strategies for gaining more L2knowledge. Quote 1.4 from Holschuh and Aultman (2008) explains why adeep approach is essential.

1.3.10 Inclusion of tactics in the S2R Model

The S2R Model includes tactics as well as strategies. Tactics are the specificmanifestations of a strategy or metastrategy by a particular learner in a givensetting for a certain purpose. Stated another way, tactics are the highlyspecific, “ground-level” applications of strategies or metastrategies in real-life situations for specific purposes and needs. In comparison, strategies arebroad and general, and many possible tactics can relate to a given strategy(Winne and Perry, 2000). Inclusion of tactics is a very important feature ofthe S2R Model. The conceptual distinction between strategies and tacticshelps reduce the imprecision that has dogged prior strategy models (seeStevick, 1989, and Oxford and Cohen, 1992, for comments). Concept 1.9contrasts strategies and tactics in a theoretical sense, while Table 1.2 givespractical examples of strategies and tactics. Later chapters provide manymore examples of strategies and associated tactics.


Concept 1.9 About strategies and tactics

• The term strategy comes from the Greek strategía, meaning the commandof a general in an attempt to win a war. Aside from military parlance, the term strategy has come to mean a general plan of action used to meeta goal. Tactics, also based on ancient Greek usage, are ways to win battles,but the term tactics has also evolved to denote the specific, applied way or ways in which a strategy is being used to meet a goal in a particular situation and instance (Oxford, 1990).

• Schmeck (1988) and Wade, Trathen, and Schraw (1990) suggested that a learning strategy is “composed” of a set of learning tactics. However, in my view, self-regulated L2 learning tactics are specific, goal-directedactions that a given learner employs in a particular sociocultural settingfor particular learning-related purposes and needs. Tactics are the way orways the learner applies the strategy at a specific level in a given situationto meet immediate requirements.

• Winne and Perry (2000) included knowledge of tactics and strategies asone of several “cognitive conditions” for learning.


The number of tactics employed for a given strategy depends on thelearner, the need, and the circumstances. For instance, many tactics (e.g.,setting goals, determining the study schedule, deciding on steps to take, andso on) can reflect the strategy of Planning, and different learners use variednumbers of Planning-related tactics. Milli, a very deliberate, systematiclearner, uses all the Planning-related tactics just listed when preparing forthe task of writing a short L2 article for the class newspaper, while Becca,a more spontaneous learner, only sets a vague goal for writing a newspaperarticle in the L2 and uses no other tactics for the Planning strategy. Milli


• Example of a metastrategy and possible tactics: A learner who is applyingthe metastrategy of Paying Attention might use the tactic of listening forspecific information in a conversation, e.g., who, what, when, and where.Many other tactics are possible for the metastrategy of Paying Attention,depending on the learner, the language being learned, the dimension oflearning (cognition, affect, or sociocultural-interactive), the physical andsocial environment, the purpose, and the needs. Some tactics reflectingthe metastrategy of Paying Attention might be focusing on the prefixes ofRussian verbs of motion, identifying in detail the emotions and attitudesof the main characters while reading a French short story, listening closelyto understand the lyrics of the Hungarian folk song, or noticing one’s ownsocial anxieties about having to give a presentation in German.

• Strategies and metastrategies for L2 learning occur in the mind and arehence unobservable. “. . . [M]any facets of SRL [self-regulated learning]are not directly observable.” (Winne and Perry, 2000, pp. 533–534)

• Macaro (2006) raised the question about where strategies are “located” andanswered the question by stating that strategies occur only in workingmemory, but his statement is somewhat incomplete; strategies involve mul-tiple aspects of memory and brain functioning, not just working memory.

• Though strategies are internal, we can frequently observe tactics in particular sociocultural settings (e.g., a learner, Michael, asks his olderChinese mentor for pronunciation help, reflecting the strategy of Inter-acting to Learn and Communicate), while other tactics are unobservable(e.g., a learner, Misha, thinks about what he has already learned so far inreading the Aeneid and predicts what Aeneus will do next, reflecting thestrategy of Going Beyond the Immediate Data). The number of L2 learn-ing tactics is theoretically infinite, because situations and needs differ forvarious learners at different times and for different purposes.

• In this book, learning strategies and metastrategies are distinguished byinitial capital letters, as in Evaluating, because they are the central coreof the S2R Model. Tactics are written as ordinary words or phrases withoutcapitalization, because there are countless tactics, tied to specific situationsand needs. This distinction is used in all cases except when describing theresearch of others, who did not typically make this differentiation.


Table 1.2 Examples of strategies, metastrategies, and tactics

STRATEGY OR

METASTRATEGY

Going Beyond the Immediate Data

Obtaining and Using Resources

Planning

Conceptualizing Broadly

Conceptualizing with Details

Paying Attention

Interacting to Learn and Communicate

Activating Supportive Emotions, Beliefs,and Attitudes

Reasoning

Activating Knowledge

Overcoming Knowledge Gaps in Communicating


TACTIC REPRESENTING THE STRATEGY OR METASTRATEGY IN ACTION FOR A

GIVEN LEARNER IN A GIVEN SITUATION

Quang guesses English meanings from the context of the reading.Specifically, he uses headings, familiar vocabulary, and topicsentences to guess the meaning from the context. (Each of these –using headings, familiar vocabulary, and topic sentences – can beconsidered a tactic.)

If Quang still does not understand a given structure that is essentialfor understanding the reading, he goes to the online dictionary orthe pocket dictionary for help.Seven-year-old Sunitha practices her English using CALLA’s(Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach, Chamot andO’Malley, 1996) strategic stuffed animals, like Planning Panda,Monitoring Monkey, Checking Chick, and Researching Racoon.

To help her rebuild schools in the war zone, Betty Lou plans toreview her knowledge of Arabic dialects and grammar at night soshe can know exactly what to say and how to say it.Mark plans his schedule carefully so he has time for distance universityFrench lessons, despite his hectic job and raising two children.Ileana decides to review her new Slovak vocabulary in carefullyspaced intervals.

Ashraf draws “semantic maps” with lines and arrows pictoriallyshowing the linkages between words or concepts while learningPortuguese.

Yoshinori learns Albanian words by breaking them down into theircomponents.

Amy pays close attention to the Korean language’s politenessfeatures so she can appropriately address Koreans of different ages.Vicky listens attentively to the speech of Bantu speakers so that shecan use the correct expressions in ceremonial situations.

Omneya and Maia study German together, particularly before amajor test.

Charles gives himself encouragement through positive self-talk while preparing to give a presentation in Swahili about Tanzanianeducation.

Marco makes deductions about English based on grammar rules healready knows.

Jing and Irina brainstorm the technical English vocabulary and theexamples they need when making a presentation on internationalconflict resolution.

While Irina presents what she is supposed to say, she cannotremember the term bilateral negotiation, so she “talks around” it,saying, “Both sides come together to talk about what they want,” andthus she continues gaining speaking practice instead of stopping.


also checks her work extensively, using a variety of tactics associated withthe metastrategies of Monitoring and Evaluating, while Becca does nottake the time. Becca’s written work is not as polished as Milli’s because ofthe limited Planning-, Monitoring-, and Evaluating-related tactics she uses,but, on the other hand, her pervasive spontaneity is sometimes helpful forL2 speaking.

Self-regulated L2 learners frequently use a strategy-tactic chain, which is a set of organized, sequential or interlocking strategies (Oxford, 1990,2001), manifested in a given situation by specific tactics.

Table 1.3 contains detailed examples of four different L2 learning strategy-tactic chains.

Chamot et al. (1996) presented a generic L2 learning strategy chaincalled the Problem-Solving Process Model: (a) Planning, (b) Monitoring,(c) Solving Problems (i.e., finding solutions to problems just identified),and (d) Evaluating. Rubin’s (2001) Interactive Model of [L2] Learner Self-Management included the following strategy chain: Planning, Monitoring,Evaluating, Problem-Identification/Problem-Solution, and Implementationof Problem-Solution. This model integrates expert learners’ knowledge basewith strategies needed to manage and control learning. Weak L2 learnersdo not use effective learning strategy chains and often do not select appro-priate strategies in the first place (Reiss, 1981, 1983; Vann and Abraham,1989, 1990). Well-known strategy chains outside of the L2 field are found inSchoenfield’s (1985) problem-solving process (Analyze, Explore, i.e., con-sider equivalent problems and break the problem into subgoals, and Verify)and DeCorte, Verschaffel, and Op’T Eynde’s (2000) cognitive-metacognitiveperformance framework (Orient, Organize, Execute, and Verify).

1.3.11 Double utility of strategies in the S2R Model

The S2R Model asserts that learning strategies are useful for “ordinary”and “severe” L2 learning problems (double utility of strategies). Ordinary and severe problems are not dichotomous but are instead on a continuum.Relatively straightforward, expected, ordinary L2-learning problems aregenerally not fraught with emotional difficulties, but more complex, unexpected, severe L2-learning problems often involve or generate anxiety and have multiple cognitive issues that must be addressed. While bothtypes of problems benefit from using multiple strategies, the second typeoften requires more strategies and more concerted effort. Let us considerexamples involving two learners: José and Mari. José has a rather ordinarylearning problem, while Mari has a more severe one.

José’s L2 assigned learning task is to prepare for a discussion in English,his L2, and carry out that discussion with another learner. He does not feeloverly stressed, because his problem is straightforward: how to prepare,how to maintain motivation, and how to speak and listen as effectively as




Tabl

e 1.

3St

rate

gy-t

actic

cha

ins

show

ing

tact

ics

and

asso

ciat

ed s

trat

egie

s or

met

astr

ateg

ies

CO

LUM

NA

WH

OS

E

CH

AIN

Luis

’ Cha

in

Mad

elin

e’s

Cha

in

Aure

lia’s

C

hain

CO

LUM

NB

WH

AT

THE

LEA

RN

ER

DO

ES

(TA

CTI

CS

)IN

THE

PA

RTI

CU

LAR

SIT

UA

TIO

NA

ND

FOR

AS

PE

CIF

ICG

OA

L

To im

prov

e hi

s En

glis

h sp

eaki

ng, L

uis

seek

s ou

t a n

ativ

e En

glis

h sp

eake

r, To

m, t

obe

a c

onve

rsat

ion

partn

er a

fter

clas

s.H

e pr

actic

es h

is E

nglis

h w

ith T

om s

ever

al ti

mes

a w

eek.

Whi

le in

a c

onve

rsat

ion

with

Tom

, Lui

s m

onito

rs h

is un

ders

tand

ing

of w

hat T

om is

say

ing.

Afte

r a

mon

th, L

uis

eval

uate

s w

heth

er h

e is

now

mor

e co

mfo

rtabl

e th

an b

efor

ew

hen

spea

king

Eng

lish.

Mad

elin

e se

ts th

e go

al o

f rea

ding

a n

ew g

eopo

litic

s bo

ok in

Rus

sian

.Fi

rst s

he p

lans

to g

et fa

mili

ar w

ith th

e bo

ok b

efor

e go

ing

into

the

book

dee

ply.

In fa

mili

ariz

ing

hers

elf w

ith th

e bo

ok, s

he s

kim

s th

e ta

ble

of c

onte

nts

and

the

inde

xto

find

the

mai

n id

eas

cont

aine

d in

the

book

.Sh

e al

so u

ses

the

skim

min

g to

hel

p he

r ev

alua

te w

hat s

he a

lread

y kn

ows

in te

rms

of c

onte

nt a

nd v

ocab

ular

y.Sh

e us

es th

is in

form

atio

n to

dec

ide

how

muc

h tim

e to

allo

w fo

r st

udyi

ng th

eco

nten

t as

she

read

s th

e bo

ok.

Aure

lia’s

task

is to

rea

d a

leng

thy

new

s ar

ticle

in E

nglis

h, h

er s

econ

d la

ngua

ge, a

ndto

writ

e a

sum

mar

y of

it in

Eng

lish.

She

sta

rts w

ith th

inki

ng a

bout

the

step

s sh

em

ust t

ake.

She

skim

s th

e ar

ticle

for

the

mai

n id

ea.

She

scan

s th

e ar

ticle

for

spec

ific

exam

ples

or

eval

uativ

e w

ords

.Sh

e ta

kes

note

s ve

rbat

im fo

r a

little

whi

le.

She

cons

ider

s w

heth

er ta

king

not

es v

erba

tim is

hel

ping

. Act

ually

, it s

eem

s to

be

taki

ng to

o lo

ng a

nd d

oes

not a

ppea

r to

be

a go

od w

ay to

pro

ceed

rig

ht n

ow.

CO

LUM

NC

STR

ATE

GY

OR

ME

TAS

TRA

TEG

Y

AS

SO

CIA

TED

WIT

HTH

ETA

CTI

C

Obt

aini

ng a

nd U

sing

Res

ourc

es

Inte

ract

ing

to L

earn

and

Com

mun

icat

eM

onito

ring

Eval

uatin

g

Plan

ning

Plan

ning

Con

cept

ualiz

ing

Broa

dly

Eval

uatin

g

Plan

ning

Plan

ning

Con

cept

ualiz

ing

Broa

dly

Con

cept

ualiz

ing

with

Det

ails

Con

cept

ualiz

ing

with

Det

ails

Mon

itorin

g


TEACHING AND RESEARCHING LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES36Ta

ble

1.3

Stra

tegy

-tac

tic c

hain

s sh

owin

g ta

ctic

s an

d as

soci

ated

str

ateg

ies

or m

etas

trat

egie

s (c

ontin

ued)

CO

LUM

NA

WH

OS

E

CH

AIN

Aure

lia’s

C

hain

(C

ontin

ued)

Hel

mut

’s

Cha

in

Not

e:M

acar

o te

rmed

the

actio

ns in

Exa

mpl

e 4,

Col

umn

B st

rate

gies

, but

in th

e cu

rrent

sys

tem

they

are

hig

hly

spec

ific

tact

ics

refle

ctin

g st

rate

gies

or

met

astra

tegi

es (

Col

umn

C).

Sour

ce: O

rigin

al e

xcep

t for

som

e ta

ctic

s in

Exa

mpl

e 4,

Col

umn

B (f

rom

Mac

aro,

200

6, p

. 327

, with

add

ition

s by

R. O

xfor

d).

CO

LUM

NB

WH

AT

THE

LEA

RN

ER

DO

ES

(TA

CTI

CS

)IN

THE

PA

RTI

CU

LAR

SIT

UA

TIO

NA

ND

FOR

AS

PE

CIF

ICG

OA

L

In a

n in

stan

t, sh

e pl

ans

a be

tter

way

: prio

ritiz

ing

the

mos

t im

porta

nt th

ings

to fo

cus

on a

s sh

e ta

kes

note

s.In

her

new

not

e-ta

king

, she

focu

ses

on (

a) w

ho, w

hat,

whe

n, a

nd w

hy a

nd (

b) th

eto

pic

sent

ence

in e

ach

para

grap

h.Sh

e th

en s

umm

ariz

es w

hat s

he h

as le

arne

d in

the

prio

r st

eps

and

puts

it in

to th

ebe

st s

umm

ary

form

she

kno

ws.

She

eval

uate

s th

e su

mm

ary

agai

nst e

xpec

ted

stan

dard

s.

Hel

mut

has

a w

ritin

g ta

sk th

at in

volv

es lo

okin

g up

new

wor

ds in

an

L1–L

2di

ctio

nary

. He

first

eva

luat

es p

rior

stra

tegi

es h

e us

ed in

doi

ng th

is, c

onsi

derin

gw

hich

of t

hese

stra

tegi

es w

orke

d an

d w

hich

cau

sed

prob

lem

s.H

e co

nsid

ers

any

prob

lem

s he

mig

ht h

ave

this

tim

e an

d pl

ans

how

to h

andl

e th

em.

He

thin

ks a

bout

the

parts

of s

peec

h an

d re

cogn

izes

the

one

he n

eeds

to s

eek

whe

n lo

okin

g up

a p

artic

ular

wor

d.H

e co

mpa

res

all t

he d

efini

tions

giv

en fo

r th

at p

artic

ular

wor

d.H

e co

mpa

res

collo

catio

ns (

wor

ds th

at g

ener

ally

go

alon

g w

ith th

e ta

rget

wor

d) in

the

L1 a

nd th

e L2

.H

e pr

edic

ts th

e de

finiti

on th

at m

ight

be

the

mos

t use

ful a

nd th

e co

lloca

tions

he

mig

ht n

eed.

As h

e co

pies

the

wor

d, h

e ch

ecks

to m

ake

sure

he

is d

oing

it c

orre

ctly

.H

e ch

ecks

his

pre

dict

ions

(se

e ab

ove)

dur

ing

the

task

.H

e ch

ecks

to m

ake

sure

that

the

wor

d m

akes

sen

se in

the

sent

ence

gen

erat

ed.

At th

e en

d of

the

writ

ing

task

, he

eval

uate

s ho

w w

ell h

e ha

s do

ne.

CO

LUM

NC

STR

ATE

GY

OR

ME

TAS

TRA

TEG

Y

AS

SO

CIA

TED

WIT

HTH

ETA

CTI

C

Plan

ning

Con

cept

ualiz

ing

with

Det

ails

Con

cept

ualiz

ing

Broa

dly

Eval

uatin

g

Eval

uatin

g

Plan

ning

Con

cept

ualiz

ing

with

Det

ails

Con

cept

ualiz

ing

with

Det

ails

Con

cept

ualiz

ing

with

Det

ails

Goi

ng B

eyon

d th

e Im

med

iate

Dat

a

Mon

itorin

gM

onito

ring

Mon

itorin

gEv

alua

ting



possible. He employs the metacognitive strategy of Planning, using this tactic:“I plan to review relevant vocabulary one hour before and then 15 minutesbefore the discussion.” He also uses the metacognitive strategy of PayingAttention by means of the tactic, “I pay very close attention to my discussionpartner’s main points, so I can understand and respond well.” He deploysthe affective strategy of Generating and Maintaining Motivation by usingthe tactic, “I pretend I am having a chat with my best friend.”

In Mari’s case, the task is more difficult, and the problem is experiencedas much more severe. Mari, a native English speaker, is studying advancedGerman and political science in a German university. To prepare a veryimportant paper in German on the topic of immigration reform in theEuropean Union, her task is to synthesize information from many different,conflicting sources written in German. She feels cognitively overwhelmedand confused, as well as fearful. She thinks she cannot do the work and isthinking of giving up on the paper, although that would be a disastrous step academically. She is in a crisis mode, but she believes that she can helpherself by means of strategies and tactics. Mari first turns the situationaround with the strategy of Activating Supportive Emotions, Beliefs, andAttitudes, specifically with this tactic: “I act as though the contradictionsare my favorite part of the research, and I decide to highlight them in the paper.” After this, she is able to employ the metacognitive strategy ofPaying Attention, applying it by means of the tactic, “I pay close attentionto the conflicting information in order to find the main contrasting view-points.” Keeping in mind the cognitive strategy of Going Beyond theImmediate Data, she uses the tactic, “I speculate on the possible reasons whythe various experts have reached widely different conclusions.” She alsoasks for help by means of the tactic, “I ask Horst, my German boyfriend,to verify my speculations and to help me express my ideas more clearly,”which reflects the SI strategy of Interacting to Learn and Communicate. Byusing these tools, Mari regulates her own learning. She learns much more,experiences far greater control over the research and writing process, andregains confidence. Because of these steps, she performs excellently on the paper. Thus, strategies and tactics can help with very serious learning situations, as well as with less difficult ones, such as José’s.

1.3.12 Relationship of styles and strategies in the S2R Model

Learning styles are the learner’s general, preferred, or habitual approach tolearning. A learning style is often expressed by an adjective (e.g., visualstyle or extroverted style), while a learning strategy is an action and should always be expressed using some form of a verb, e.g., Planning, and a tactic is a specific action in a highly particular situation for a givenneed and (at least in this book) is expressed by a longer description (seeConcept 1.10). The learner can become conscious of his or her own present



Con

cept

1.1

0C

omm

on le

arni

ng s

tyle

dom

ains

, asp

ects

, defi

nitio

ns/c

omm

ents

, and

exa

mpl

es o

f re

leva

nt t

actic

s an

d st

rate

gies

Styl

e do

mai

ns

Sens

ory-

styl

e do

mai

n

Soci

al-s

tyle

do

mai

n

Styl

e as

pect

s in

eac

h do

mai

n

Vis

ual s

tyle

Aud

itory

styl

e

Han

ds-o

n (k

ines

thet

ic-

tact

ile) s

tyle

Ext

rove

rted

styl

e

Intr

over

ted

styl

e

Defi

niti

ons

and

com

men

ts

Pre

fers

to ta

ke in

(pe

rcei

ve)

info

rmat

ion

thro

ugh

sigh

t. “I

see

wha

t you

mea

n.”

Pre

fers

to ta

ke in

info

rmat

ion

thro

ugh

soun

d. “

I he

ar w

hat

you’

re s

ayin

g.”

Pre

fers

to ta

ke in

info

rmat

ion

thro

ugh

touc

h or

mov

emen

t. “I

gra

sp it

,” “

I ge

t it,”

“T

his

mov

es m

e” o

r ev

en (

hum

orou

sly)

“Thi

s tic

kles

me.

”

Pre

fers

to e

nerg

y fr

om p

eopl

ean

d ac

tiviti

es; l

ikes

to w

ork

with

othe

rs.

Get

s en

ergy

from

inne

r th

ough

tsan

d fe

elin

gs; l

ikes

to w

ork

alon

eor

with

one

oth

er p

erso

n.

Exa

mpl

es o

f a

rele

vant

tac

tic

and

an a

ssoc

iate

d st

rate

gy

A t

acti

c re

late

d to

the

sty

le

aspe

ct

I re

mem

ber

the

Ara

bic

wor

ds a

bout

di

plom

acy

by c

reat

ing

men

tal

pict

ures

to r

epre

sent

them

.I

use

tape

s to

com

pare

my

pron

unci

atio

n of

the

Fede

rico

G

arcí

a L

orca

poe

m to

that

of a

na

tive

Span

ish

spea

ker.

I pr

actic

e m

y R

ussi

an v

ocab

ular

y fo

r U

nit 9

whi

le w

orki

ng o

ut o

n th

e tr

eadm

ill.

I m

eet w

ith L

aura

and

Rob

erto

to

stud

y G

erm

an th

is T

uesd

ay.

I w

ork

alon

e to

stu

dy th

e se

ven

Khm

er in

fixes

, bec

ause

bei

ng a

lone

al

low

s m

e to

thin

k m

ore

deep

ly a

nd

reas

on th

ings

out

.

Stra

tegy

tha

tco

rres

pond

s to

the

tac

tic

Usi

ng th

e Se

nses

to

Und

erst

and

and

Rem

embe

rU

sing

the

Sens

es

to U

nder

stan

d an

dR

emem

ber

Usi

ng th

e Se

nses

to

Und

erst

and

and

Rem

embe

r

Inte

ract

ing

toL

earn

and

Com

mun

icat

eR

easo

ning



Pro

cess

ing-

st

yle

dom

ain

Not

es:A

n im

mat

ure

vers

ion

of th

e an

alyt

ic s

tyle

is th

e hy

perf

ocus

ed s

tyle

, whi

ch li

kes

smal

l pie

ces

of in

form

atio

n, is

hyp

erfo

cuse

d on

det

ails

but

not r

elat

ions

hips

bet

wee

n de

tails

, and

avo

ids

syst

emat

ic a

naly

sis,

whi

le a

n im

mat

ure

vers

ion

of th

e co

mbi

nato

ry s

tyle

is th

e ov

erly

fuzz

yst

yle,

whi

ch p

refe

rs n

o an

alys

is a

nd fe

w d

etai

ls, a

ccep

ts o

nly

high

ly g

ener

al in

form

atio

n, a

nd ig

nore

s an

y ne

ed fo

r ac

cura

cy (O

xfor

d, M

asse

y, a

ndA

nand

, 200

5).

Ana

lytic

sty

le

Com

bina

tory

(syn

thes

is-

orie

nted

)st

yle

Con

cret

e-se

quen

tial

styl

e

Abs

trac

t-in

tuiti

ve s

tyle

Clo

sure

-or

ient

ed s

tyle

Ope

n st

yle

Syst

emat

ical

ly b

reak

s in

form

atio

ndo

wn

into

par

ts to

und

erst

and

or s

how

rel

atio

nshi

p am

ong

the

part

sSy

stem

atic

ally

bri

ngs

part

sto

geth

er in

a c

ombi

natio

n or

synt

hesi

s to

und

erst

and

or r

evea

lth

e bi

g pi

ctur

eP

refe

rs c

oncr

ete

fact

s, o

ther

-di

rect

ed, s

tep-

by-s

tep;

doe

s no

tw

ant t

oo m

any

choi

ces;

like

s to

have

an

auth

ority

figu

reP

refe

rs a

bstr

act t

heor

ies

and

mul

tiple

pos

sibi

litie

s; o

ften

nons

eque

ntia

l; pr

efer

s to

mak

eow

n ru

les;

doe

s no

t wan

tau

thor

ity fi

gure

sN

eeds

qui

ck d

ecis

ions

; pre

fers

tow

ork

tow

ard

spec

ific

dead

lines

;m

ore

seri

ous

than

pla

yful

Pre

fers

to k

eep

deci

sion

s op

enan

d co

ntin

ue ta

king

inin

form

atio

n; d

islik

es d

eadl

ines

;m

ore

play

ful t

han

seri

ous

I an

alyz

e th

e es

say

by M

onta

igne

to

dete

rmin

e th

e m

ain

argu

men

t and

the

evid

ence

he

give

s.

I sk

im th

e C

zech

sto

ry v

ery

quic

kly

to g

et th

e m

ain

idea

bef

ore

read

ing

it m

ore

care

fully

.

I cl

osel

y fo

llow

the

step

s in

the

Japa

nese

ass

ignm

ent a

nd th

e sp

ecifi

c gr

adin

g cr

iteri

a th

e te

ache

r pr

ovid

es.

Bas

ed o

n m

any

exam

ples

of a

giv

en

stru

ctur

e th

at I

enc

ount

er, I

figu

re

out t

he g

ram

mar

rul

e in

Hun

gari

an.

It’s

not

as

inte

rest

ing

whe

n so

meo

ne

else

tells

me

the

rule

s.I

set c

lear

goa

ls fo

r st

udyi

ng D

ari

duri

ng th

is w

eek,

Apr

il 4–

10, a

nd

chec

k ho

w w

ell I

fulfi

ll th

em.

I ca

re m

ore

abou

t enj

oyin

g th

e H

ebre

w le

sson

with

my

pal A

ndre

w

than

abo

ut m

eetin

g an

y ar

tifici

al

dead

lines

.

Con

cept

ualiz

ing

with

Det

ails

Con

cept

ualiz

ing

Bro

adly

Pay

ing

Att

entio

n

Rea

soni

ng

(a) P

lann

ing

and

(b) E

valu

atin

g

Inte

ract

ing

toL

earn

and

Com

mun

icat

e



cluster of learning styles by means of general self-reflection or by taking a learning style survey. Some aspects of a given learner’s styles – especiallyintroverted/extroverted, concrete-sequential/abstract-intuitive, and closure-oriented/open – can be influenced by the sociocultural context, the subjectarea, and the learner’s level of expertise and are therefore not fixed through-out the lifespan. A welcoming sociocultural context might cause a learnerto prefer lots of interaction, while a rejecting or indifferent socioculturalcontext might influence the same learner to prefer to work alone and be silent (Norton, 2010). A learner might prefer deadlines in courses in international relations but, in another field, like learning French, want tokeep taking in information for much longer. In other words, although thelearner might have some strong style tendencies, they are not set in stoneand are influenced by the sociocultural context.

1.4 Nine ways the S2R Model is different

In this chapter we have discussed many aspects of the S2R Model of L2learning, and subsequent chapters offer still more aspects. In comparisonto other strategy-related models of L2 learning, this model opens up new doors in nine ways. The S2R Model systematically integrates threemajor traditions of learning theory and research: psychological, social-cognitive, and sociocultural. The psychological tradition of strategies isvery diverse, including strategies as related to schema (mental structure)development, comprehension, cognitive information-processing, metacogni-tion, motivation, emotion, and beliefs (this chapter and Chapters 2 and 3).The social-cognitive strand deals with strategies as associated with task-phases, self-efficacy, and social comparisons (this chapter). The socioculturaltradition involves strategies (often called “higher mental functions” or“operations”) as linked with mediated learning, instrumental enrichment, theZPD, communities of practice, and cognitive apprenticeship (this chapterand Chapter 4).

Second, the S2R Model provides a better balance of dimensions thanmany prior learning strategy models. This model overtly recognizes that L2learning is not just a cognitive/metacognitive process but is also influencedby a complex web of beliefs, emotional associations, attitudes, motivations,sociocultural relationships, personal interactions, and power dynamics.Therefore, sufficient attention must be paid to affective strategies andmeta-affective strategies (Chapter 3) and socio-interactive strategies andmeta-SI strategies (Chapter 4), as well as cognitive and metacognitivestrategies, which often garner the most attention (Chapter 2).

Third, the S2R Model introduces not just metacognitive but also meta-affective and meta-SI strategies as part of a new and important concept,



metastrategies, discussed earlier in this chapter. The use of metastrategies,which include but are not limited to metacognitive strategies, makes goodsense semantically, logically, and theoretically.

Fourth, the S2R Model states that metastrategies, such as Planning,Organizing, Monitoring, and Evaluating, are naturally usable at either thetask level or the whole-process level. Several social-cognitive models ofself-regulated learning view these as only related to a particular task-phase(e.g., strategies used before, during, and after the task), but the currentchapter says otherwise.

Fifth, the S2R Model underscores the importance of deep processingstrategies, as opposed to surface strategies, as noted in this chapter. Othermodels do not necessarily discuss the difference between deep processingstrategies and surface strategies.

Sixth, the S2R Model mentions “double utility” of strategies and meta-strategies. Double utility means that they can be used in situations involvingordinary learning problems or circumstances marked by severe or crisis-likelearning problems.

Seventh, the S2R Model includes the fewest strategies and metastrate-gies (a total of 19) needed for self-regulated L2 learning; therefore, themodel can be viewed as scientifically elegant. At the same time, the mod-el’s inclusion of tactics allows for tremendous flexibility and adaptability. Asexplained in this chapter, tactics are the very particular applications ofstrategies or metastrategies in real-life situations for specific purposes andneeds. Tactics can often be “chained” or smoothly interlocked for besteffect, building on my concept of strategy chains (Oxford, 1990). The waytactics fit into activity theory is portrayed in Chapter 2.

Eighth, the S2R Model pays close attention to the neurological elementsof L2 learning and to cognitive load, which most L2 strategy models donot adequately discuss. Chapter 2 shows why these elements are importantand how they relate to strategies.

Finally, the S2R Model embraces a large number of valuable techniquesfor assessing L2 learning strategies and assisting learners in expandingtheir strategy repertoire. Some of these techniques have not been includedin prior published discussions of L2 learning strategies. All of these aspectsmake the S2R Model different from other strategy models and an enhance-ment to the field of L2 learning strategies.

1.5 Conclusion

This chapter has focused on the Strategic Self-Regulation (S2R) Model ofL2 learning. This model, with its rich interdisciplinarity, echoes Bakhtin’s(1998) concept of heteroglossia, which is defined as a multiplicity of voices,



dialects, styles, vocabularies, and idioms shared among people. The modelis intentionally heteroglossic, echoing the voices and vocabularies of differ-ent viewpoints, such as psychological, social-cognitive, and sociocultural.At the same time it is a unified, logically coherent system. I have used andtested the evolving S2R Model in my teaching of international graduatestudents for the last six years.

The S2R Model deserves further empirical testing in sociocultural con-texts around the world, although most of its component theories and aspectshave been widely researched and accepted within educational psychology,as shown in Chapters 2 through 4. Each of those chapters examines onedimension of L2 learning and of self-regulated L2 learning strategies, revealsmany examples of relevant strategies and tactics in action, and presentssupporting theories and research. All the strategies and tactics included inthis book come from actual learners.

Further reading

Boekaerts, M., Pintrich, P.R., and Zeidner, M. (2000) Handbook of Self-Regulation. SanDiego, CA: Academic Press. This book reveals and dissects the close ties betweenstrategies and self-regulation in education, psychology, and other areas, with strategiesmentioned or emphasized in almost all learning-related chapters. See especiallychapters by Zimmerman; Pintrich; and Weinstein, Husman, and Dierking.

Cohen, A. and Macaro, E. (eds) (2007) Language Learner Strategies: Thirty Years of Researchand Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press. This landmark book explores thefield of L2 learning strategies over the last three decades of research and practice.Some of the chapters push strategy theory into the sociocultural arena and explorecritiques of L2 learning strategy research and theory.

Griffiths, C. (ed.) (2008) Lessons from Good Language Learners. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press. This book explores strategies along with motivation, aptitude, andother learner factors and presents updates on research on all the major languageskill areas. The skill-related chapters can be read in parallel with those in Cohenand Macaro (2007).

Kozulin, A., Gindis, B., Ageyev, V.S. and Miller, S.M. (2003) Vygotsky’s EducationalTheory in Cultural Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Vygotsky’shigher-order mental functions, which are very similar to learning strategies(McCaslin and Hickey, 2001), are well portrayed here, as are other key concepts inVygotskyian theory.

Oxford, R.L. (1990) Language Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher Should Know.Boston, MASS.: Heinle and Heinle/Cengage. This is a highly practical work on L2 learning strategies. It spurred much strategy research around the world andencouraged teachers to understand and foster learners’ use of learning strategies.

Zimmerman, B.J. and Schunk, D. (eds) (2001) Self-Regulated Learning and AcademicAchievement. Second edition. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. This book presents a varietyof theoretical and practical perspectives on self-regulated learning in academic settings and is essential reading.


Documents

Section I The Strategic Self-Regulation (S2 Model of ...catalogue.pearsoned.co.uk/assets/hip/gb/hip_gb_pearsonhighered/... · Section I The Strategic Self-Regulation ... What are